IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Derek Hansberry Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1984-02-04 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2003-04 Central Texas Blackhawks NAHL 56 12 20 32 0.571 0.2099 0.2020 0.6031 0.5803
2004-05 Wichita Falls Wildcats NAHL 50 16 17 33 0.660 0.2425 0.2212 0.6966 0.6355
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2008-09 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 BigTen SR 27 16 9 25 0.926
2007-08 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 BigTen JR 27 19 19 38 1.407
2006-07 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 BigTen SO 29 21 14 35 1.207
2005-06 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 BigTen FR 27 18 16 34 1.259
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.26
2005-06 · Wisconsin-River Falls
+588.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#21306
Forward overall
#630
Forward born in 1984
#1492
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tanner Froese
St. Norbert · 2013-14
0.615 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Felser
SUNY Cortland · 2014-15
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Billy Foulds
Manhattanville · 2001-02
0.640 Average
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.